Courses Alternatives to Coursework as Means of Demonstrating Knowledge

AI Thread Summary
Coursework is criticized for its inability to measure long-term knowledge retention, as assessments typically occur at the end of a course rather than allowing for the natural absorption of material over time. The discussion highlights the limitations of traditional grading systems, which do not accommodate different learning styles and the cumulative nature of subjects like math and science. While GRE Subject tests exist, their perceived low difficulty raises concerns about their effectiveness in reflecting true knowledge. The desire for a standardized exam system akin to AP or SAT II exams is expressed, as it would allow students to demonstrate mastery without the need for additional coursework. The conversation also touches on the challenges of self-study and the motivation required to revisit material after a course has ended. Overall, there is a call for more flexible assessment methods that recognize diverse learning processes and provide opportunities for students to validate their knowledge independently.
Simfish
Gold Member
Messages
811
Reaction score
2
The problem with coursework is that coursework is structured in such a way as to "measure" knowledge at the end of the course. It provides no means of measuring knowledge months after the course, when one may have absorbed the course material better (especially since learning is best done over a period of months, especially as one must review the material in order to learn material on top of that). One could choose research, but you can't really compare one's research with another, and the results of research are highly dependent on chance variables such as the selection of project and that of mentor.

I know that there are the GRE Subject tests, but the level of those subject tests aren't so high. Moreover, I don't want to be accused of being a "lazy bastard" just because of high GRE scores and low GPA. I do pull numerous all-nighters and spend numerous hours on homework - it's just that my learning style is different from that of others, and as a result, I don't absorb material very well on the first try, but absorb it better through mistakes that I've made (and I tend to be motivated by coursework to pull all-nighters to study - it's harder to do that by purely self-studying). I'm actually less distractible during all-nighters (but it's just the way I tend to operationalize how hard I need to work).

Ideally, I'd like there to be an exam system similar to that of AP exams and SAT II exams (or the systems that some other universities use, that you can pass out of the material). But yet here, you can only take exams by taking more and more courses. Evidently, it's not a good way to demonstrate knowledge because people learn at different rates and some may learn better after reviewing the material over a period of months after the course.

I could try to arrange with a professor to "re-take" an exam independently of the course - but that's not going to accomplish anything... (unless the professor is going to write a rec for me).

Anyways, this is how I tend to view lectures:
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=97194

Anyways, so my questions are
(1) anyone with similar experiences?
(2) any suggestions other than pre-studying? (which is the obvious route, which I'm planning on doing, but this isn't going to help with courses I already didn't do that well in - but learned well through self-study later on)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Simfishy said:
The problem with coursework is that coursework is structured in such a way as to "measure" knowledge at the end of the course. It provides no means of measuring knowledge months after the course, when one may have absorbed the course material better (especially since learning is best done over a period of months, especially as one must review the material in order to learn material on top of that). One could choose research, but you can't really compare one's research with another, and the results of research are highly dependent on chance variables such as the selection of project and that of mentor.

I know that there are the GRE Subject tests, but the level of those subject tests aren't so high. Moreover, I don't want to be accused of being a "lazy bastard" just because of high GRE scores and low GPA. I do pull numerous all-nighters and spend numerous hours on homework - it's just that my learning style is different from that of others, and as a result, I don't absorb material very well on the first try, but absorb it better through mistakes that I've made (and I tend to be motivated by coursework to pull all-nighters to study - it's harder to do that by purely self-studying). I'm actually less distractible during all-nighters (but it's just the way I tend to operationalize how hard I need to work).

Ideally, I'd like there to be an exam system similar to that of AP exams and SAT II exams (or the systems that some other universities use, that you can pass out of the material). But yet here, you can only take exams by taking more and more courses. Evidently, it's not a good way to demonstrate knowledge because people learn at different rates and some may learn better after reviewing the material over a period of months after the course.

I could try to arrange with a professor to "re-take" an exam independently of the course - but that's not going to accomplish anything... (unless the professor is going to write a rec for me).

Anyways, this is how I tend to view lectures:
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=97194

Anyways, so my questions are
(1) anyone with similar experiences?
(2) any suggestions other than pre-studying? (which is the obvious route, which I'm planning on doing, but this isn't going to help with courses I already didn't do that well in - but learned well through self-study later on)

Either you're smart enough to do the work or you're not. Lowering academic standards hurts those who are capable of excelling.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Simfishy, you have noticed that often subject-matter retention is a problem, and you also noticed the often overlooked method which some people try to avoid; study the course again to review it and learn it better. Getting motivated to do this is difficult, but actually doing it is effective. Once people pass a course, they do not want to study it again, because they already have their course credit. They need some concepts and skills from the course, but they do not want to improve them.
 
Either you're smart enough to do the work or you're not. Lowering academic standards hurts those who are capable of excelling.

Is allowing people to retake tests indicative of lowered standards? The fact that the SATs can be retaken multiple times does not lower the standards of the SAT (same goes for APs and SAT IIs). Somehow, there is no standardization at the college level, which hurts those with independent learning styles.

Either you know the material or you don't (by the time you apply). The problem is, that the lack of standardized exams at the college level (or means to demonstrate ability) prevent some people from demonstrating ability.

Besides, I like taking exams, and I find that the environment that I take them into be very conducive to learning. I consider exams as a learning experience more than anything else. Yet I'm frustrated that it's apparently only possible for me to take them by taking classes.

Yes, that's true, many people don't want to study their courses again. The problem is that I have a different learning style (and it's not an issue of intelligence - it's learning style - I do understand the material very well after I learned it - it's just that I tend to encounter the main barriers early in learning, rather than later on - and I understand the material better than most people do since I approach all of my material by asking questions such as "how does it fit into the general framework of things"; etc etc etc). And I don't want it to disable me when I know full well that I can master the material (in say, for example, the summer after not doing particularly well in a course).

The main thing is that knowledge in math/science is cumulative. My knowledge in linear algebra or differential equations may not be complete by the time I "finish" a course, but I need to review it later on, and find my understanding of them MUCH improved after reviewing them (after finishing a course that only lasts for 2.5 months)

And under the traditional system, I don't find ways to demonstrate knowledge in fields that I've self-studied. I'd like a way to do this (I could jack exams off MIT OCW - but then I can't prove that I took them out cold without looking at the answers)
 
Last edited:
Hey, I am Andreas from Germany. I am currently 35 years old and I want to relearn math and physics. This is not one of these regular questions when it comes to this matter. So... I am very realistic about it. I know that there are severe contraints when it comes to selfstudy compared to a regular school and/or university (structure, peers, teachers, learning groups, tests, access to papers and so on) . I will never get a job in this field and I will never be taken serious by "real"...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Back
Top